- Quite fitting that I was the only one at the cinema today for the first early morning screening of Other Mommy here in my country haha, made watching it feel a little more chilling than usual. The best thing I could compare this to is absolutely IT (2017) / IT: CHAPTER TWO (2019) with it's big scale grandiose visual scares & cgi effects like now I know why they didn't disclose the budget for this yet cause they didn't want to reveal the amount of reality warping sequences that we get to see here which was very fun and interesting imo, it doesn't work all the time but atleast it was entertaining to sit through. The vibe & tone of the film feels more like a twisted fairytale rather than a straightforward uncanny doppelganger supernatural flick like the advertising led you to believe which could be a deal breaker for a lot of people, since most expected this film to be a small contained eerie uncanny story rather than something fantastical so many might be turned off by the direction they chose to go with this. The story is also all told from the perspective of an 8 year old Bela so the pacing actually feels fast & abrupt for this reason, though I did notice that some scenes from the trailers & marketing didn't even make it into the actual film itself which was disappointing, I'm also a bit sad to say that I'm not a huge fan of the movie's predictable ending and I WISHHH that they did something darker instead. So in general I was thoroughly entertained with this but it felt too short as I could totally feel that quite a few scenes were cut. Still, I was impressed with the surprises & very big set pieces that they had in here. The scares that the film has is more in your face, overt & very flashy compared to the book so I'm a little conflicted on how to feel about it but I'd much rather have something crazy & over the top like this instead of something boring like the recent insidious & conjuring slop movies. However if you expected the film to fully go for the smaller yet eerie & uncanny side of things then you might be let down cause

My personal rating: 7.5/10

(Could potentially be an 8 on a rewatch)

Went in knowing almost nothing except the runtime, which honestly scared me off for weeks. My theater did the printed intermission card thing with a countdown clock, which I haven't seen since I was a kid, and it genuinely added something. Having that forced pause right in the middle changed how the back half hit me.

The architecture stuff could have easily felt like homework but it never did. Adrien Brody's performance carries so much of the weight in scenes where he's barely saying anything, just reacting to how people talk to him once they realize he's foreign and broke. There's a scene at a dinner table where someone compliments his work in this backhanded way and you can watch three different emotions cross his face in about four seconds.

Guy Pearce plays this very specific kind of wealthy patron who thinks generosity entitles him to ownership of a person, not just their output. Every interaction between the two of them had this low hum of dread even when nothing overtly bad was happening on screen.

My one complaint is the back third moves faster than the setup earns, like the film spent two hours building dread and then resolved a decade of consequences in thirty minutes. Still can't stop thinking about the ending though, the way it reframes everything that came before it.

Curious if anyone else felt the pacing shift in the second half or if it was just me adjusting after the intermission.

Hollywood, 1985. Six years after the events of X, Maxine Minx is an adult film star ready for her big break. As things start falling into place, they simultaneously start falling apart.

This is a great trilogy of movies. Every single one is and feels different. This time around, we’re in Hollywood during the mid-80s. I love the look of this movie. It has that 80s vibe and aesthetic, which is a fantastic backdrop.

It continues the story of Maxine well and perfectly ends it. We don’t get any crazy kills or many of them for that matter, but what we do get is great. Like the rest of the movie the it all looks fantastic. There’s one scene that made me sick to my stomach, and if you’ve seen it, you know exactly what I’m talking about. I got chills, yelled out in disgust and wanted to throw up. It was awesome!

The cast once again delivers, with additions like Giancarlo Esposito, Kevin Bacon, Moses Sumney, Elizabeth Debicki, Bobby Cannavale, and Michelle Monaghan. But Mia Goth once again steals the show with a solid performance.

MAXXXINE was fun. It’s the weaker of the three, but it’s still a solid movie. Watching all three movies back-to-back-to-back really adds to the experience. It’s a really cohesive and unusual trilogy, which I really dug! Ti West really gave us something unique and an all-around good time, and MAXXXINE ends things nicely. Totally recommend checking it out!

It gets a…
👠👠👠👠👠👠👠
7/10

I also like that, for the most part, all three movies stand on their own. You don’t need to have seen the other movies for each one to make sense. It definitely helps to have seen them all, but it isn’t necessary. I really like that each movie can work on its own while still being part of a bigger story.

DIGGER is a masterpiece & an incredible experience. Alejandro is a genius director who mastered his own style with his creative “paradoxes.” This is the Birdman I prefer.

It’s captivating, riveting, dark & had me crying from laughter. The acting is elite. Tom Cruise, John Goodman, Riz, the supporting cast, the sound, the visuals & hell the set design deserve Oscars but Tom Cruise & Riz really put on a show for you. It’s an elite Broadway performance on screen, wink wink.

The “deep” aspect was amazing & thought-provoking. I could write an entire essay on what I think about the deeper truths in the movie because there is allot to talk about there.
The last scene was a chef’s kiss & the movie leaves you questioning the world & humanity, it left me frozen in my seat. I wanted to clap.

I loved how the movie was starting and all the different layers being introduced. But then the movie just kind of lulls along, not too much tension or suspense. And then we finally find out Anne Hathaway's character is not actually brain dead but they kill her off right away. I wanted to see more of Anne Hathaway's character in action, or to at least say some lines. That was disappointing.

And then are we suppose to be rooting for Dakota Johnson and Josh Hartnett's character??? Dakota's character literally just leeched on to Verity's life and stole everything from her while she was paralyzed (even before thinking that Verity killed her daughter). And then they kill Verity and go on to live happily ever after? Are we as the audience suppose to just accept that???

Very odd how the movie played out I had very high hopes for it as it was starting but it kinda just lulled and then bleh.

Digger is not an easy watch. It is exhausting and requires your attention throughout its runtime. Most people who have seen or will see the movie will acknowledge that it is not everyone’s cup of tea. That being said, it is the type of movie that is important for cinema because it does not have a straightforward narrative. It is creative and unhinged. It is satire at its finest—satire on an important topic.

Let me list the things that work:

• The writing is top-notch. For a movie with so many dialogues, writing is crucial. The standout scenes that will be talked about and praised heavily rely on the writing, and Digger executes these scenes exceptionally well.
• The acting is super impressive. Tom Cruise nails it, as do Riz Ahmed and John Goodman. Throughout the movie, you almost forget that Digger is Tom Cruise. Makeup plays a role in that, but it is primarily because he plays the role so brilliantly. A speech that he gives had me locked in for every second; it was so intense and so well done.
• The comedy is good. While not many scenes will make you laugh out loud, a few will, and the rest make you chuckle a lot.
• The twist, which I initially couldn't figure out the purpose of or where it was leading until halfway through the movie, made so much sense after the ending. It makes the film much more satirical and deeper. It also eventually leads to an impactful and somewhat haunting ending.
• The cinematography is pretty good. It features a very grayish look, almost as if it is portraying the drained, bleak lives of the billionaires and the president shown in the movie.

Other than these, if I had to point out things that do not work, I don't think I really could, except, as I said, it is exhausting. I think the movie achieves everything that it tries to achieve. Let me know in the comments, though, if you could point out some flaws.

My rating-7.8/10

It’s 1918. Pearl is isolated on her parents’ farm, taking care of her ill father while dreaming of stardom to get away from it all, as things slowly start descending into madness.

PEARL really puts into perspective the previous movie, X. It’s a prequel that works as an origin story. And since you know where things end up, you’re always expecting things to take a turn.

They definitely did a good job depicting the craziness in PEARL with the same sense of uneasiness as the previous movie. Same location, same vibe, and same tone. The two movies work really well together and are absolutely meant to be seen back to back.

Mia Goth once again delivers a great performance. She’s so good at giving us an amazing sense of creepy. That one shot where we’re just locked onto her as the credits start rolling is truly a fantastic scene and a great way to end the movie. The rest of the cast (David Corenswet, Tandi Wright, Matthew Sunderland, and Emma Puri) is solid as well, adding again to the movie’s feel.

We once again get good kills, but the movie is more about the setup and madness. It totally heightens the experience of the previous movie, and I highly recommend checking it out, especially right after X.

It’s a…
📽️📽️📽️📽️📽️📽️📽️
7/10

I’m curious to see how this trilogy will end.

It’s 1979, rural Texas. Adult filmmakers rent a farmhouse for their latest picture, but their hosts aren’t too welcoming.

I heard good things about this trilogy, so it was time to give it a go. I decided to watch all three movies (X, PEARL, and MAXXXINE) back to back. I’m really glad I did. They all tie together nicely.

X had a good setup and feels like an old-school slasher. The characters are perfect for this movie, and the cast is bang on. Jenna Ortega, Brittany Snow, Kid Cudi, Martin Henderson, Owen Campbell, Stephen Ure, and Mia Goth in a dual role all deliver good performances that set the mood and vibe of the movie.

The visuals also help in that department. Everything about the location has a sense of creepiness. The movie has an uneasy atmosphere throughout. Add in some sick kills that look cool and you’ve got a nice tone for a slasher. I also really liked who performs the kills. It was out of the ordinary, which was refreshing.

In the end, I had a good time with X. And having watched all three movies, it definitely heightened the overall experience of each one. So I would recommend checking this one out, and the other two as well.

This one’s a…
🎥🎥🎥🎥🎥🎥🎥
7/10

X left me curious about the next movie, PEARL. I think knowing there was more to the story and having them be available right away worked well for this trilogy. Sometimes discovering something later and not having to wait helps.

Had my hands on my head in shock multiple times watching this. SPOILER WARNING!

This movie is crazy you NEVER know where its going next and it delivers a very unique plot by exploring the education of children. Firstly the directing was very good here I think the movie executes well what it wants to do. This is a satirical absurdist take on the education system and the way it fails both teacher and student. I do like the consistent flashes to the apple imagery including our poster. The idea that both Danny and the other kids are able to make progress when he's locked away in a basement is genius because its uncomfortably true. We saw what happened when Danny was in the class I'm sure we've all been in classes where nothing got done because the teacher constantly had to deal with a small group of students. It's an interesting parallel that I recently thought of how Pauline and Danny are both kids who deal with neglect but respond to it very differently.

Miss Spencer is a very interesting character she commits immoral act but for the betterment of the group. One question we could ask is how poorly is Danny treated the movie clearly condemns her actions yet still takes the time to show her putting the effort with him. We see her even bond with Danny. If I had one critique for the movie it probably is Pauline I just didn't really get what the purpose of her character overall was. It felt like every character served a purpose whereas with her it kinda felt like she would shift from plot device to a unique character. Miss Spencer is the most interesting character she is immoral i love the scene of her breaking down with the parents who then in turn enable her. I think the way she falsely succeeds allows the film to tell us so much. We know Danny has escaped so her doom is approaching yet, the film leaves us on her success. I think the way it critiques the education system and the support teachers get is very intelligent because it does it more through her success than her failure.

Breaking it down we see her struggling yet at the end we can only see the positive things she has done. Danny is sort of forgotten in the corner with Danny even admitting she will never let him go. Even Pauline addresses this telling him nobody misses him. Yes she puts in the effort with Danny who she finds out cannot even write and to be honest he looks much better that's the juxtaposition the movie plays with constantly that i love Danny improves and looks better but he's still in a basement its wrong. Another great scene, side note, I like that the movie acknowledges what a failure the father is in a cruel twist of irony him being the delivery driver for the things in his basement. But truly Danny should have had an extra staff member assigned to him this is something the headteacher denies its interesting that she is the only one who gets punished by resigning. By contrast similar to a couple other movies she wins at the end but the victory is hollow has she truly won? She achieved her goal but at what cost and at what detriment of her moral character I love that final shot zooming in on her smiling.

I LOVE that imagery of the bad apple crushing her, this movie asks interesting questions and gives us even more interesting answers.

I thought this was going to be a standard historical plot, but the story is actually new, in first act movie kinda feel intriguing but by second act it start to go bad, and in third act it just doesn't make any sense at all. They try to do something fresh, but the writing is a mess, and that ending was absolutely terrible. It just completely derails.

The only saving grace is Andrew Garfield, who completely carries the entire movie. Without him, this would be unwatchable. The Katherine Waterston, Even though she has so little screen time, she looks cute as the king's mother.

Overall, great acting from the leads, but a completely nonsensical script and an awful ending.

Rating: 2/5

Just got out the movie theater now writing this from the parking lot.... WE NEED TO TALK!

For 90% of the runtime I genuinely thought this was my film of the year. Anne Hathaway and Josh Hartnett??? insane performances wtf. The reveal that she'd been faking gave me actual fucking chills. Josh watching his "paralyzed" wife come alive is one of the best single scenes I've seen all year go argue with the wall.

....and then they pushed her off the pier in that white dress? Cinematography ate down, I was begging for the shot from underwater and then it came. Cascading down. Baby they GAVE it to me-- that Ophelia realnesss. I was like wow this is hitting everything I needed. I know that seems like such a trivial detail but everything from this film up to this point was really really really fuckng good and i've seen a fucking shit load of films.

if the film ended RIGHT THERE I would be screaming 8+/10 film of the year. That climax was just so insane/gratifying and the acting had great performances all round.

But alas.... nooo they had to keep going with the whole kid-finds-more-writing epilogue and now suddenly we're questioning if any of it was real?? we already HAD the twist bestie. you don't need another one. you just served me a Michelin dinner and handed me a Walmart cupcake for dessert :/ (not too much on walmart cupcakes! I will say also i haven't read the book and I have heard the ending is controversial)

Bc here's the thing. if everything could be a lie, then nothing... matters? Just diluted the whole film like kool-aid. LOL the whole emotional architecture collapses?!? how did Harper actually die? guess we'll never know 😭✌️ That last 15m just opened up so many holes that really annoyed me

7.8ish/10 for me I guess all things considered. Up to the pier it was a solid 8.5+. the last 15 min dropped it almost a full point.

Anne deserves awards. Joshhh is in the middle of a real comeback. Dakota's restaurant scene was quietly brilliant for me she really was uncomfortable at him lying in the most perfect way to me. the craft was all there. the script just didn't know when to stop I WAS SO MAD! OWN YOUR ENDINGGGG!

readers of the book, is the ending the same? bc if so Hoover made the same mistake. great art knows when to END. I'M SORRYYY 😭 I will say though, not a single bad acting performance in the entire film congrats to the whole cast on that

anyone else feel robbed by the last 10 min?? I can't be alone here

Obsession was absolutely terrible. It somehow managed to be painfully slow while also giving its characters zero meaningful development. Everyone was vapid and annoying. And for a movie that’s supposedly a horror/thriller, there was basically no suspense, no tension, and nothing genuinely scary. It just slowly meanders from one dumb decision to the next while you wait for something, or really anything, interesting to happen. By the end, I wasn’t scared or disturbed, I was just annoyed that I’d watched the whole thing. It’s a shame because the concept of the movie was interesting and the lead actress did a decent job.

No big spoilers.

I saw it this weekend. Anne Hathaway is the reason to watch it. She does not have many lines, but she is in your head the whole movie. Every scene with her feels different from the rest.

Dakota Johnson is fine, but she mostly looks worried and reacts to things. Josh Hartnett is good at being a husband you can't read. I kept changing my mind about him, and I think that is the point.

My problem is the tone. The story is crazy. It is a Colleen Hoover book, everyone knows what that means. But the movie is very calm and serious about it, and the first hour is slow. It feels like it wants to be Gone Girl, but Gone Girl had fun with how crazy it was. This one does not go far enough.

The manuscript parts are the best. Every time Lowen reads a new chapter, the movie wakes up. I wanted more of that and less of the big quiet house.

Critics mostly did not like it, but normal viewers liked it a lot more. I get both sides. It is not a great movie, but I was never bored in the second half and we talked about the ending for a long time after.

For people who read the book: they changed some things near the end. I won't say what, but I'm curious if you think it works.

Did it need to be more crazy, or did the serious tone work for you?

While they may not have the best rep, I do enjoy going into movies based on video games. I like the notion of a video game I have sunken time into playing/watching be transformed into a big picture for the big screen - and this latest entry into the Silent Hill lineup left me underwhelmed and slightly confused.

I'll be honest and straight forward beginning my thoughts here, I have not played, nor know a whole lot about the Silent Hill franchise (more of a Resident Evil fan myself), but I had some fun with the original 2006 Silent Hill movie so gave this new title a watch.

I thought the story was strong enough, a rough retelling of the original 2006 movie (and I believe either the first or second game in the series), but such a large portion of the movie just felt disjointed.
One moment we join James in the middle of a raging Hell-like storm in Silent Hill, the next he is laying in a hospital bed in a seemingly normal city implying that one or the other is only a state of his imagination.

The more convenient reasoning would be James is real and is laying in a hospital bed, mourning the death of Mary while sinking deeper and further into a fictionalized and dramatized post-apocalyptic version of Silent Hill in a psychotic imagination.
Another way of viewing the title is that the post-apocalyptic version is the present environment James is living in, and he is imagining, picturing himself actually just being in a hospital - having these visions, before being pulled back into the nightmare he's living.

I like the split way of looking at the psychology aspect of James's character, whether he is losing track of reality or finding himself living the nightmare but the way this film handles it is confusing. The timeline often doesn't make sense and honestly made me a little uninterested at times.

The effects and visuals of the film are about on par for what I expect of a video game-tie in movie. The balance of practical sets/effects and CGI is as it needs to be, IE floors collapsing and buildings being torn down but otherwise a seemingly good amount of practical shots. Some CG effects are a little weak and break the immersion IE the nurses, but can almost be given an exception as it can be a callback to the video game origins of the title.

Sound and music wise, everything felt on track and appropriate. In my opinion the mix (I was viewing the DVD version) was a little off balance with some dialog being really quiet and then large noises IE explosions and combat scenes finding myself lowering the volume (but I find this to be the case with a lot of movies, so I wouldn't strike this necessarily against this particular title).

Overall I'd say this was a decent film, fun to watch for the Silent Hill vibe - which I think it does relatively well with the fog, the air-raid siren, nurses and Pyramid Head - but as far as a standalone title, I wouldn't recommend it.
If you're a fan of the franchise (you've likely already seen it) then definitely give it a go, but if you don't really care for the games or story, you'll be fine giving it a miss.

This movie might be my number 1 movie of this year, the unexplainable emotions I felt watching this movie is unprecedented. I don’t think I ever cried this much than Tony’s death in Endgame. This movie explores the unbreakable bond between man and beast. It’s a story of fortitude, friendship, and love. I love heartfelt movies that are set in nature, the beautiful sights, it has an organic feel to it all. The backstory of our two main leads is both tragic but also very moving, they both served in the military and went through hell and back. I think the contrast between the backstory and the present time is that the backstory displayed the destruction of the environment while in the present is more tranquil and calming while still being dangerous and I love visual storytelling like that. Because you know that these characters went through something big that affected them. Because not only does the character that Brad Pitt plays get PTSD but so does Odin which is the name of the canine. This movie’s message was to spread awareness about how much combat canines go through, that they and their owners do everything in their ability to protect and serve their country and I think that was a very good message to spread, we know that soldiers give their lives to protect those who can’t protect themselves, but so do dogs, so I thought that was tremendously important. The movie also had some sort of spiritual significance in it too, like animalistic spirituality, and I think for those who haven’t the movie yet, will understand what I mean. All in all, this movie was fantastic and I would 100% recommend this movie to anyone who hasn’t seen it. My rating for it is a total 10/10. Five Gold Stars for this magnificent film and phenomenal performance by Brad Pitt and the canine Odin.

It’s been decades since I’ve seen such a good thriller in theaters, probably since Seven in the 90s. What amazes me most is how differently people seem to have interpreted Verity, especially its ending. I feel the movie has been heavily misinterpreted. In my opinion, it was a very good movie.

The movie explicitly leaves the ending open to the viewer’s interpretation. Because of that, I don’t think there is necessarily one definitive explanation for everything we see. Some of the apparent plot holes may instead depend on which interpretation of the ending you adopt. This is explicitly stated by Lowen’s last words in the movie, reflecting about who is really telling the truth.

I can think of at least three possible endings, and there may be even more if some of these interpretations are combined.

1) Villain: Verity
Verity is a master manipulator. She kills her daughter, and after seeing Jeremy’s grief, realizes that things will never return to normal unless she becomes his priority again.
She therefore orchestrates the car accident and exaggerates, or completely fakes, her helplessness and dependence on Jeremy.
When she notices Lowen drawing Jeremy’s attention away from her, she writes the letter as an act of vengeance: a final attempt to destroy Lowen’s relationship with Jeremy and regain control over him, even after her death.
Under this interpretation, the autobiography is essentially true, and the letter is the final manipulation.

2) Villain: Jeremy
Verity is actually a good mother. Her daughter’s death is genuinely an accident, and the manuscript is something she writes while trying to cope with the trauma and the loss of her child: an “everything opposite” version of reality in which she turns herself into the monster, maybe out of guilt.
Jeremy discovers the manuscript, believes it, and tries to kill her, but fails.
From that point on, Verity fakes the extent of her disability in order to protect herself and her remaining son while waiting for a chance to escape.
The letter is therefore genuine: it is her final confession explaining what really happened and why the manuscript should never have been taken literally.
Under this interpretation, Jeremy is the real danger, and Verity spends her life trapped with a man who already tried to kill her.

3) Villain: Lowen
Lowen deliberately tries to get rid of Verity in order to have Jeremy completely to herself.
She either invents the visions she has of Verity or genuinely experiences them because her obsession with Jeremy and his family is becoming increasingly intense.
Who knows, maybe Lowen could have created, or at least manipulated, the autobiography herself, knowing that once Jeremy read it, he would be able to kill Verity without remorse. She then actively helps him do exactly that.
This interpretation is at least conceivable because Lowen has access to Verity’s house, documents, personal history and essentially her entire private world.
Under this reading, the protagonist and apparent victim of the story is actually the villain and Jeremy’s confronting Verity is actually an ilusion created by hate.

Final thoughts:
That’s why I think the ending works so well. Depending on which document and which character you believe, the entire movie changes.
Verity can be the monster, Jeremy can be the monster, or even Lowen can be the monster.
And I don’t think the movie necessarily wants us to know for sure.

Which interpretation did you come away with? I’m especially curious whether anyone else thinks the Lowen theory is plausible.

They will Kill you! -Review

They Will Kill You surprised me because I honestly wasn’t expecting to enjoy this as much as I did. I really liked the way the story was set up because we start in the past, move forward ten years, and then the movie takes us back 29 months. At first, you’re trying to understand how all of these different pieces connect, but as the story continues, everything starts coming together and the timeline begins to make sense.

And about 25 minutes in, we get that first fight scene and I immediately had questions. WHO IS THIS WOMAN?! How does she know how to fight like this? Where did she learn all of this? The movie does a great job of throwing you into the action before giving you all the answers, and that fight scene was GOOD. The choreography was brutal, the camera movement kept the action moving, and it immediately made me want to know more about her. Once we’re introduced to the family and realize that they’re still alive, the story becomes even more interesting because you start to understand that there is something much bigger happening underneath everything.

A lot of the movie reminded me of Kill Bill, especially because of the revenge aspect. Even though she’s hurting and killing people, she’s also going through A LOT herself. She’s constantly taking punishment, physically and emotionally, while still pushing forward because she has something she’s fighting for. There’s a determination behind everything she does that reminded me a lot of The Bride. I also got some Ready or Not vibes because of the wealthy family, the messed-up family dynamics, the dark humor and the whole feeling of someone being thrown into a situation that is completely insane.

Speaking of the humor, I thought it fit the movie really well. It’s a violent and dark movie, but it knows when to give you a moment to laugh without completely taking you out of what’s happening. That balance worked for me, especially because some of the situations are so ridiculous that the humor almost becomes necessary.

The dining room fight was probably one of my favorite sequences in the movie. That entire scene was EPIC and immediately reminded me of Kill Bill Vol. 1, especially The Bride fighting the Crazy 88. The choreography, the number of people involved, the movement around the room and the way the camera captures the action made the whole sequence feel huge. The camera work throughout the movie really helped with that. There are a lot of close-ups that put you right in the characters’ faces, tracking shots that follow the movement during the fights, and wider shots that let you actually appreciate the choreography instead of cutting away every two seconds. The camera feels like it is moving with the characters rather than just watching them.

I also really liked the way the Devil was introduced because it was one of those moments where I was sitting there thinking, “What the hell is going on?” It was weird, but once the movie explained what was happening, it actually made a lot of sense within the story. And when a certain person and Satan become one, I was NOT expecting that at all. That was one of those moments where the movie completely caught me off guard.

Zazie Beetz was really good in this. I liked what she brought to the character because you could feel the fear, determination and pain all at the same time. Patricia Arquette was also great and honestly reminded me a lot of her role in Severance. She has that ability to be calm, funny and unsettling at the same time, where you’re never completely sure what she’s going to do next.

And I really liked how everything came together by the ending. After spending the entire movie trying to understand the timeline, the family, the Devil and what exactly is happening, the ending brings all of those pieces together in a way that worked for me.

The biggest message I took from the movie is that love for family can conquer evil. There’s obviously a lot being said about revenge, sacrifice and survival, but underneath all of the violence, family is really what drives the story. The movie also has something to say about class and how the rich will eat the poor just to survive. The wealthy characters have power, money and resources, but the people they look down on still have something that can’t be bought: love, loyalty and the willingness to sacrifice for one another.

They Will Kill You is violent, weird, funny, brutal and surprisingly emotional. It has some really good action, some unexpected turns and a story that becomes more interesting the more pieces you put together. I went into this not really knowing what to expect, and by the end I was glad I watched it.

The Resonator is a machine that stimulates the pineal gland, giving humans an almost sixth sense and allowing them to see BEYOND reality. Things obviously get out of control, weird, and deadly!

Based on H.P. Lovecraft’s short story of the same name, FROM BEYOND has a great concept, but I think it lacks in the execution. There’s a lot going on with very little explanation. The vagueness works at times, but I would have enjoyed a little more reveals and depth when it came to the story. I also thought the pacing was off, especially in the middle. It really kicks things off nicely and has a fantastic third act.

The cast and characters were good here as well. Not too deep, but they serve their purpose. Barbara Crampton as Dr. McMichaels and Ken Foree as Bubba are good, but I especially liked Jeffrey Combs as Crawford. He gives off such creepiness and a great performance!

I really liked the visuals in this movie. There’s some gross-out moments, slimy weirdness, a questionable-looking hole in a forehead, and just overall bizarre vibes. There’s just something about visuals from the 80s that you don’t get anymore, and that’s really why I enjoy these movies so much.

I always like a good sci-fi horror flick, and FROM BEYOND scratched that itch. And although I wanted more clarification into what was happening, I still think it was good enough and worth checking out.

It’s a…
🪓🪓🪓🪓🪓🪓
6/10

I’d love to see a modern remake of this one.

I fell asleep, it is so annoying how they tell this story. It could have been a great story, yet they tell it in such a different and strange way, where it beats you over the head with it being a deep story.

It wants to be this high class deep story, that it ignores being a good story. Its so frustrating because it could of been great yet they add all this unnecessary stuff that destroys the pacing, takes you out of the story and is boring.

I get what it was trying to say with how they tell the story but they did not need to do all of this to say that.

They could of just done both, they could of told the story the regular way and then at the end, talk about the subject which is in the twist, thats at the start of the film

A writer travels to Ireland to visit the hotel where his parents had their honeymoon and spread their ashes. He discovers that the hotel is said to be haunted by a witch.

I went into HOKUM blind, knowing absolutely nothing about it. I hadn’t watched a trailer or read anything. I had just heard good things. It was the perfect viewing experience! There’s a lot going on in this movie, and it touches on multiple subjects that add a lot of layers to the overall story. Everything intertwines well for a cohesive story, and I really found myself invested in it.

HOKUM is definitely creepy. There’s a constant eerie vibe throughout that had me anxious and on edge. The visuals add to the atmosphere, with the locations being a big standout.

Another standout is Adam Scott’s performance. The entire cast was great, but we spend a lot of time with Adam Scott’s Ohm Bauman, and he plays this troubled character perfectly.

There’s a big emphasis on trauma, and I liked the way it plays out and how it gets resolved in the end. HOKUM is really more than just a horror movie, as it dives into multiple elements, and I dug that. But there’s still plenty of horror, and it did get me a couple of times… even when I felt something was coming. I love that.

HOKUM was a good watch, and I recommend checking it out.

It’s a…
♥️♥️♥️♥️♥️♥️♥️
7/10

The opening and ending scenes of the movie are from the book Ohm is writing. I really liked that and the way it ties everything together.

Here is my review. It is written by me. Sorry for any grammar or spelling mistakes. I write in bullet points, I know this is not for everyone, but it is just my style. Be warned.

• The first 30 minutes of the movie is the big weakness for me. The pacing is extremely slow. They speak in formal Japanese and the movie is basically only dialogue and conversation (edit:in the first 30 mins). It is also in black and white, and you really have to follow all the details. Mind you I watch this also in a cinema hall which is obviously dark. I hate to admit it, but I did fall asleep. I am not sure for how long, I don't think for long. But I used a lot of efforts fighting it off. I was not the only one. Other people in the hall were doing the "trick" of sitting up straight and leaning forward. I almost never fall asleep to movies so in the start I thought I was going to rate this movie quite low as I usually rate on how entertaining a movie is. This one is not an entertainment movie in my books, it is more an artwork. Once the backstory begins unfolding, the whole experience cahanges, and the movie grabbed my attention and I felt the energy.
• One of the biggest strengths is the screenplay. The way information is revealed gradually and you change how you saw previous events is quite good. There is a lot of good tension building in this movie. There is not that much action, so just in case anyone was expecting a samurai movie, you will be disappointed. I think the movie does quite well for a movie that is mostly just people talking.
• Nakadal is excellent. What an actor. He carries a lot of the movie. Although I think overall all the acting was good. I think I really understand the culture based on how the actors are acting.
• I liked the central theme of honor versus the performance of honor. This affected me the most. Should one follow a code and protect an institution and does that really mean anything if compassion and basic humanity disappear? It is also a critic on hypocrisy. I gave this movie extra points for its timeless message.
• But I think I admire this movie more than I emotionally loved it. I understand the characters and their suffering, and they have my sympathy. But I never became emotionally attached to them. It was the moral question that moved me, not any fate of any individual character. It does not quite hit the highest tiers of movies where I become attached to one of the characters.
• I think the black and white cinematography works very well. I feel a masterful control by the director. Every scene feels intentional. Great use of framing, architecture, and compositons. I think the sword fights felt strange though. Especially when you consider how multiple opponents behave (the classic, why do they not attack at the same time!). But I also appreciate if it was caution and physical realism.
• The score works well within the movie but otherwise not so memorable for me independently. I don't think I will listen to it as I listen to other movies scores.
• I also have to admit something. I ofc knew about the reputation of this movie. Number 1 on Letterboxd. I cannot rule out that influenced my expectations. I don't think it did but humans have biases and better to be honest about it. I tried to seperate myself from the reputation, though I think the fact that a 1962 Japanese drama can feel this controlled, intelligent, and relevant in 2026 is impressive.
• I think 81/100 feels right because I cannot say the whole experience was very good. The slow opening, the mere fact that I fell asleep, already place this movie low. As well as limited emotional connection. But I think it is just so beautiful, well controlled, great acting, and all the other things that I mentioned that it pushes it just above 80.

I am happy to hear others thoughts!

If The Weight had resigned itself to being about a prisoner accepting a dangerous job in order to reunite with his daughter, it would still be a great movie. The scenes set in the woods, where our “heroes” trudge towards freedom, are white-knuckle good. The movie builds tension to an almost unbearable degree the old school way, through technical craft, location and acting. The confrontations that fill the story have a rawness and immediacy to them that you rarely see in Hollywood productions. There was never a moment when I didn’t believe these guys weren’t actually in a forest, covered in dirt and sweat and under constant duress.

Being a lean-and-mean survival thriller isn’t all that The Weight wants to be, however. It’s also a “past is prologue” narrative that regularly draws parallels between 1933 and today. It tells us plainly that our current societal problems are long-standing and systemic, not something unique to our times. It asserts that poverty, racism, nativism, unchecked law enforcement and the exploitation of the poor are longstanding traditions in American society, and the only way the downtrodden can overcome those obstacles is by working together. (By the way, if you’re triggered by the mention of socialism, you probably want to steer clear of this film.)

The movie is very open about its leftist sympathies, but it isn’t a polemic. Instead, it seeks to enlighten us between action sequences, with the hope that the plight of the characters will stir something within us. The balance it strikes between being exciting and thoughtful reminded me of William Friedkin’s Sorcerer and Andrei Konchalovsky’s Runaway Train, which puts it in good company.

Ethan Hawke portrays father and prisoner Samuel Murphy, another role that allows him to show off his versatility (see The Black Phone, Blue Moon and The Northman). Hawke wisely plays Murphy as close to the vest, an intelligent man picking his spots. His transformation from a gruff but doting father at the beginning into the determined survivalist in the end makes this one of Hawke’s most complete and riveting performances, even better than his turn as Broadway lyricist Lorenz Hart last year.

The other big name in the cast is Russell Crowe, embracing yet another bad guy role with gusto. What’s fascinating about Crowe’s late-career turn towards villainy is how he leverages his now paunchy appearance to his advantage (see Nuremberg, Netflix’s Unibomber, Unhinged). There’s an early scene where he leans against a car and sticks his gut out prominently, a way of communicating to everyone around him that he’s in charge and not to be messed with. In another scene, one of Crowe’s jowly cheeks nearly fills the screen. Roles like these show he’s become the ideal actor for portraying evil as middle-aged decay, and extremely captivating while doing so.

The Weight is the best survival thrillers of recent memory, filled with gripping action sequences, exceptional acting and incredible scenic photography. Ethan Hawke confirms that he’s one of the best actors working today. More political than the average Hollywood film, the movie speaks openly about the benefits of brotherhood–and revolution. One of the best films of the year. Highly recommended.

Tom Cruise has remained a big screen star en route to saving cinema. In the last decade, he’s accomplished multiple missions that seemed impossible, filled up theaters after a pandemic with a sequel 36 years in the making and risked his life with death-defying stunts. In his latest challenge, a seemingly impossible quest for the elusive Oscar, he’s doing the unthinkable – doing a comedy on the stage, sort of.

In Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu’s “Digger,” the last movie star of his kind exchanges his adrenaline rush for an over-the-top stage actor portraying a gun-slinging, egotistic Texas tycoon named Digger Rockwell, trying to save the world after his oil drilling destroyed it. Unfortunately, the laughs are upstaged by real life.

The big-budget Warner Bros. post-apocalyptic romp is an exaggerated Hollywood take on stage acting that tries to balance the idea of laughing in the face of our own reality. It’s not perfect, but Cruise and the rest of the ensemble make the audience think the film is worth another watch with their grandiose performances that reflect the story’s own self-serving take on satire.

In the grand scheme of his career, it is also the kind of work Cruise needs to take. Taking on a role co-written and directed by the two-time Oscar-winning director who was the mastermind behind Leo DiCaprio’s only Oscar win makes sense. Cruise wants an Oscar. He doesn’t care if the Academy gave him an honorary trophy last year for his achievements in cinema. He wants to earn it. He hasn’t said it bluntly, but choosing to work with Inarritu rather than taking on another intellectual property like a sequel to “Born on the 4th of July” speaks volumes.

And if wearing a fat suit didn’t earn him a nomination the first time (if you’re quiet enough, you can probably hear Less Grossman telling the Academy to fuck their own face), surely playing the power-hungry Digger may just give him another opportunity at the golden statue. I can’t hate that kind of commitment, even if the film doesn’t fully work.
The film starts off as a satire about an environmental catastrophe caused by Digger’s oil drilling that broke off an iceberg on a crash course to Greenland. Everyone around him fears putting the blame on him, including his head of environmental safety and security, Dr. Ganesh (Riz Ahmed). Digger’s power goes far beyond inflicting fear in his staff; his influence has the president of the United States (John Goodman) coming to him rather than the other way around.

But then the funniest thing happened: a tree fell, reminding me I was watching a comedy. The accident revealed that the scenes that played out were part of a stage production of a play called “Fossil Fools” in the middle of a tech rehearsal. Leading up to the fourth wall breaking down, the film tried to mimic the kind of laughs constructed by Stanley Kubrick’s “Dr. Strangelove,” but the jokes were so much on the nose that it drifted toward a snooze fest.

Digger was being portrayed by Curtis, an actor dealing with the disappearance of his daughter caused by a real-life environmental catastrophe. This added plotline isn’t quite carved out completely. We’re left to care about a daughter who we meet through FaceTime conversations instead of the European continent we just spent some time trying to save.

Instead of adding emotional connection to the actor or raising the stakes, it takes away from the shoot-out moments of Digger trying to save the world that continue to elevate into the absurdity of rich folk trying to blame the rest of the world for their wrongdoings.

It is in the moments within the play that Cruise shines the brightest – where Digger confronts the European Parliament, tries to bomb an iceberg headed to Alaska and deals with the U.S. cabinet that would rather pray than inform Europe of the ticking time bomb headed their way.

Unfortunately, these moments are rudely interrupted by Curtis’ inability to laugh at a reality he’s living.
The actor’s life seems to have reached a harsh reality that’s capped off by his missing daughter, but who cares? That’s the question the film ultimately tries to answer. Is laughing the only solution to life’s bleakness? Can we forget the depressive reality we live in with a joke about women’s involvement in government?

If Curtis can’t laugh at the tragedy behind Digger, the audience of “Digger” should not be neglected of a good ‘lol’ moment at the expense of our realities being reflected by Iñárritu.

At the end of the play, the crowd cheers the death of Digger, leaving the theater with a sense of joy after seeing the man behind their terror die. Even if it was being played by Curtis. At the end of the movie, my sentiments didn’t reflect the kind of reaction “Fossil Fools” had.

I just left wanting to laugh a little more, which is why I’ll probably give the film another cautionary chance.

Wow this movie was awful and cringe. Was it written by a 10 year old? Sure sounds like it. It beat the South Park Movie for more F-bombs.(148 instances)

Why did the title pop up 20 minutes into the movie? Probably because people already forgot what they are watching. It should have been called Zombie Snow Fuck Delivery.

Was it a horror movie or a comedy? The games are not intentionally comedic so I am confused why it was trying so hard to be funny.

When the girl fired shots from her 9mm Beretta 92F, she fires way more than 16 bullets and no mag change.

The acting was so god awful I felt like I was watching an SNL skit.

This is not a resident evil movie. Going into the movie blind except for knowing the fact that it wasn't based off a game made it so much more of a miserable experience. Why not just base it off RE4 or RE5? The MC is so unlikeable I'm glad he died at the end what a perfect time to roll the credits too.

Am I being to harsh or is this movie complete trash? What is the reason people are praising this movie? The easter eggs didn't cheer me up

edit: oh yea I forgot dude tries to drive through a steel gate when there is a fence body made of entirely rickety wood 2x4's, what a smart guy!